|
Post by ChrisM on Jun 13, 2017 19:52:01 GMT
Banter, comments etc here please...... Will Nicole cause Lewis to have a howler like he did last year, or can he keep driving like he did in Canada?
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jun 14, 2017 11:15:14 GMT
I had no idea that Nicole had interfered with Lewis' performance last year. However he was lamentable.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jun 22, 2017 17:59:50 GMT
I had to copy your comment here Ian before Chris gets upset.
Boxer6 said: "Oh aye; Old Course or Castle? "
Neither actually - Mar Hall at Erskine which I like. It's pretty flat and well drained but it is long so I need to be on my best hitting game
|
|
|
Post by Boxer6 on Jun 22, 2017 19:38:59 GMT
I had to copy your comment here Ian before Chris gets upset.
Boxer6 said: "Oh aye; Old Course or Castle? "
Neither actually - Mar Hall at Erskine which I like. It's pretty flat and well drained but it is long so I need to be on my best hitting game
|
|
|
Post by Sav on Jun 23, 2017 23:23:58 GMT
I do wonder how a restart would practically work. There wasn’t a Safety Car period last year, but there were several in the GP2 race. The principle issue is the sheer length of the pit straight, and where the Safety Car line is located. It means that the leader will probably be passed before turn 1. However, the concertina before the Safety Car line is the dangerous aspect; you’ll have cars start accelerating at different points, and although the F1 boys are more orderly, I struggle seeing it being incident-free either.
Another issue is anticipating where the Safety Car is on restarts. The final corner is ultimately turn 16, because turns 17, 18 and 19 are flat-out. However, these three turns are blind. So it’s going to be difficult to gauge where the Safety Car is, Vettel was once penalised for dropping too far behind the Safety Car in Hungary. Last year in GP2, someone misjudged the gap to the SC going into the pits; he then jammed on the brakes to avoid passing the SC.
To alleviate the issue to an extent, I suggest returning to the rule where no overtaking is permitted before the start/finish line. There would be less disparity in speeds going into turn 1, and it would still be exciting – but less dangerous.
Some aspects of this circuit are still quite frankly bizarre, like the narrowness of the castle section. In a way I like it, it has an old-school look in sections.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2017 17:56:56 GMT
I think Vettel had a get out of jail free card somewhere. Ramming another car and NOT being black flagged. Lucky geezer. Lots of action that was a fantastic race but seriously off kilter.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Jun 25, 2017 21:56:42 GMT
A strange character is Vettel. Looks like he's losing his cool and its still so early in the season. What happens when he gets to the last race of the season and theres one point between him and Hamilton. All of Hamiltons championships have been lost and won in massive pressure environments and Vettels walked his so that might tell when it matters. Really can't believe he got away with a 10sec stop/go.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 26, 2017 0:34:15 GMT
Hamilton brake tested Vettel as the SC was leaving the track. For all his whinging about the slow speed of the SC to then back up the car behind you is just poor sportsmanship so Hamilton got what he deserved from Seb with that wheel banging. The racing Gods obviously agreed because they gave Seb more points despite the penalty.
Great race but the motoGP race blew it into the weeds. Kudos to Bottas: Drive of the day imho.
|
|
|
Post by rodge on Jun 26, 2017 1:37:21 GMT
Hamilton brake tested Vettel as the SC was leaving the track. For all his whinging about the slow speed of the SC to then back up the car behind you is just poor sportsmanship so Hamilton got what he deserved from Seb with that wheel banging. The racing Gods obviously agreed because they gave Seb more points despite the penalty. Great race but the motoGP race blew it into the weeds. Kudos to Bottas: Drive of the day imho. Agreed. Hamilton was being a muppet, and Seb replied by also being a muppet so Hamilton whinged and still lost out. For a pair of multiple world champions, they are acting like idiots.
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Jun 26, 2017 5:31:30 GMT
The stewards have looked at the data and Hamilton didn't brake test Vettel. Whatever happened, there's no excuse for deliberately driving into another car and why is Vettel denying it happened?
Anyway, all that aside, mad race but it mixed things up nicely. I was surprised at how well Stroll did all weekend, but good on him.
|
|
|
Post by humphreythepug on Jun 26, 2017 6:26:10 GMT
The stewards have looked at the data and Hamilton didn't brake test Vettel. Whatever happened, there's no excuse for deliberately driving into another car and why is Vettel denying it happened? Anyway, all that aside, mad race but it mixed things up nicely. I was surprised at how well Stroll did all weekend, but good on him. Yep not brake checked at all, before the stewards became involved there was a replay and David Coulthard stated the the revs remained constant throughout, Lewis controls the front and did nothing wrong, Vettel was just caught out. Vettel should have been black flagged for that, you don't deliberately drive into an opponent because you are angry, his RB petulance days are starting to shine through again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 7:15:10 GMT
Getting away with driving into another car deliberately is a demonstration of how far people will go to protect the competition and the F1 money flow. He should have been black flagged and banned for a number of races.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jun 26, 2017 7:50:51 GMT
Yeah, but F1 has a history of letting drivers get away with it when they drive into another car...
Off the top of my head: Senna and Nannini, Salazar (?) and Piquet, Schlesser and Senna, Prost and Senna, Schumacher and Coulthard, Schumacher and Villeneuve (penalty applied late when it didn't affect the result of the championship)
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 26, 2017 8:48:39 GMT
The real penalty is that if Seb hadn't got the drive-through penalty he would have won the race because Mercedes can't build a headrest. Either that or Hamilton's head is too big......
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 26, 2017 10:11:08 GMT
Yeah, but F1 has a history of letting drivers get away with it when they drive into another car... Off the top of my head: Senna and Nannini, Salazar (?) and Piquet, Schlesser and Senna, Prost and Senna, Schumacher and Coulthard, Schumacher and Villeneuve (penalty applied late when it didn't affect the result of the championship)
Salazar is correct. You've missed out Mansell & Senna plus Senna and Eddie Irvine.
|
|
|
Post by humphreythepug on Jun 26, 2017 10:34:35 GMT
Yeah, but F1 has a history of letting drivers get away with it when they drive into another car... Off the top of my head: Senna and Nannini, Salazar (?) and Piquet, Schlesser and Senna, Prost and Senna, Schumacher and Coulthard, Schumacher and Villeneuve (penalty applied late when it didn't affect the result of the championship)
Salazar is correct. You've missed out Mansell & Senna plus Senna and Eddie Irvine.
Maldanado did it at Spa, cut acroos someone and took part of their wing off, IIRC, he got off lightly too.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Jun 26, 2017 11:01:27 GMT
Even in the crash fest that is the BTCC, do that and you'll be at the back of the grid for the next race as a minimum. Without being too much of a weeny but when the message from the FIA is all about road safety, its not really acceptable for the pinnacle of the sport to behave like something out of a Russian road rage compilation on you tube.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 26, 2017 11:03:23 GMT
Oops. I only half read what Chris had written, I thought he was referring to the various fisticuffs over the years
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 26, 2017 15:56:25 GMT
Sir Jackie The Kilt has waded in and also thinks Da Ham was arsing about but that Seb was naughty and petulant.
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Jun 26, 2017 16:38:39 GMT
They're both childish wankers IMHO. They should just let them both settle it privately, mano a mano.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 17:07:00 GMT
Ricciardo is on Hamilton's side.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 17:18:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Eff One on Jun 26, 2017 17:56:41 GMT
My impression at the time was that Vettel red-misted and banged wheels with Hamilton accidentally while gesticulating. Which is juvenile and petulant and unacceptable for a top sportsman. If it was deliberate then he's brought the sport into disrepute and needs stomping on, hard.
I don't see that Hamilton did anything wrong. The data showed no attempt to brake test Vettel, and why on earth would he risk damage anyway?
Also - fair play Lance Stroll. Kept his head when most around him were losing theirs.
|
|
|
Post by Sav on Jun 26, 2017 22:52:10 GMT
When ex-Ferrari F1 boss Stefano Domenicali was the FIA’s Single Seater Commission President, he cancelled the remaining Formula 3 races at Monza because of the wild driving in the first race. I really don’t like over-zealous action over incidents; if you put 20 cars out there in the heat of competition, it is invertible that they will occasionally collide. However, there are scenario’s that require stern action.
The FIA has been very good at setting a standard for other championships to follow. Even though sportscar racing had the “code 60” for some years, the introduction of the Virtual Safety Car highlighted the glaring issue of excessive speeds under yellow flags for other championships. Yesterday was another example where the FIA needed to set a precedent for others to follow. Particularly with open wheel cars, deliberate contact is a big no-no. One might say the contact happened at low speed. But if someone only gets a 10 second stop and go penalty for that, perhaps dishing out your anger might be worth it? And what if such deliberate contact happens at higher speeds in the future? It doesn’t take much to get these cars airborne, and perhaps we would be talking about a different story.
I have been a big fan of the FIA encouraging the stewards to let the race play out, not penalising contact as a mere formality and respecting that hard racing will sometimes result in mistakes and collisions. However, this wasn't hard racing. This was deliberate contact under Safety Car conditions. While the stewards have been correct to not penalise common racing contact, they needed to give a harsher penalty to Vettel to send the message that such rage will result in harsh consequences. This unfortunately comes down to the random nature of the steward panels - an issue not only related to this GP. I'm not going to criticise Danny Sullivan, the race steward for Azerbaijan, he was a great driver back in the day. Danny would have certainly given his professional input, but there are other stewards from the various motosport associations around the world who would have been equally as influential. IndyCar, IMSA and the Pirelli World Challenge have permanent steward panels, and they are all the better for it. You get consistent and appropriate decisions from people who know about the intricacies of their particular series, rather than a bunch of new stewards every weekend who are learning on the job. Especially as the selection criteria looks like a lot to be desired. As the FIA's driver steward, I vote for Tom Kristensen. He's been a steward before, and I can't think of a more level-headed, informed driver steward.
This controversy was a product of the restarts, which were always going to be a problem. The leader in whatever series had no choice but to start accelerating after the final turn. If Hamilton has bolted before turn 16, he would have given Vettel a gigantic slipstream along the pit straight. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, it would have been impossible to see the Safety Car because turns 17, 18 and 19 are blind. On the first restart, Hamilton came perilously close to actually overtaking the Safety Car before it entered the pits.
Hamilton had no choice but to restart at different points in order to get away from the chasing pack. As an example, on the first restart he bolted just after turn 16. On the second restart he went just before the Safety Car line. If Hamilton had repeated his restart like the first time, he would have been swamped before turn 1. Any driver would have done this. The most bizarre aspect is that Vettel thought Hamilton would bolt after turn 15. You would have had to been a complete mug to do that, offering an almighty slipstream for the chasing pack. Vettel surely had to know that Hamilton was never going to restart the race after turn 15. If he had, he would have passed the Safety Car before it entered the pits, resulting in a penalty.
The continual Safety Car periods reminded me of a NASCAR race, the old saying there is that cautions breed cautions. True enough, turns 1, 2 and 3 were simply too inviting for there not to be contact on restarts. Ocon misjudged where Perez was and that slammed them both into the wall. That debris bought out another Safety Car period. In more teammate turmoil, Ericsson collided with Wehrlein going into turn 3. The situation seems desperate at Sauber, Wehrlein actually had to ask if he could overtake Ericsson. Oh dear, Ericsson’s financial backers appear to be even hijacking the race strategy. I think that will only lead into a downward spiral, what if Sauber have an opportunity to hire someone who might be quicker than Ericsson? Better not, that someone might upset Ericsson’s investors!
I do question Race Control’s decisions yesterday. The final two Safety Car periods and the red flag was simply an overreaction. The pieces of debris were located between turns 2 and 3, therefore marshals would have had time to clear the debris before the cars came back around, given the length of the track. At worst, a Virtual Safety Car would have frozen the field at a regulated speed, without the need for another restart. The Virtual Safety Car was supposed to be have been introduced to negate full physical deployment of the Merc for debris and stricken cars. Watching yesterday’s race, one would have thought that the VSC didn’t exist.
Azerbaijan was perhaps a turning point in the season, and not for the restarts or accidents. I believe Mercedes have taken a step forward in terms of car development, whilst Ferrari’s development has been rather static. Mercedes’ Spanish GP update was eye-opening, and now they’ve been curing their tyre warm-up issues on smooth surfaces, as the front lock-out for Mercedes illustrated in Azerbaijan. Ferrari run the risk of the same weakness that denied them of the championship in 2012, as they failed to bring updates that improved the car against Red Bull.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jun 27, 2017 11:50:05 GMT
I agree on the VSC and can't understand why it wasn't used. Especially when a race is well through it is unfair that someone's hard fought lead should be snatched away because of someone else's mistake.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 27, 2017 13:16:15 GMT
I disagree: the VSC on a street circuit with small debris removal is an accident waiting to happen: unlike the SC which bunches all the cars up so there is a nice long gap before that phat (sic) Merc arrives the VSC keeps the cars at the designated gap they had, so there probably isn't enough time for a person to leave a position of safety, recover the bits / sweep up a bit and return to a position of safety.
The red flag was bollocks though.
|
|
|
Post by Eff One on Jun 27, 2017 14:30:18 GMT
They really need a faster safety car. Something like a Mclaren 720s or Ferrari 488 would do. Or even a GT3 car.
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jun 27, 2017 15:31:55 GMT
They really need a faster safety car. Something like a Mclaren 720s or Ferrari 488 would do. Or even a GT3 car. How would Alonso keep up with a 720S?
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Jun 27, 2017 15:41:46 GMT
Well they've got the AMG GT-R which is supposed to kick the arse out of most things around the ring in standard format so in tricked up F1 pace car, I think you'd struggle to find something quicker.
For me they should have two pace cars one on slicks and one on extreme wets to suit all conditions and means the car will be significantly quicker in the dry than a car on treaded tyres.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 15:50:09 GMT
They really need a faster safety car. Something like a Mclaren 720s or Ferrari 488 would do. Or even a GT3 car. How would Alonso keep up with a 720S? Fit a higher gearing to his pedals......? I do wonder how he manages with that tight cockpit........
|
|